From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/61481 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Katsumi Yamaoka Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: spam mails using image/gif in multipart/alternative Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 21:29:26 +0900 Organization: Emacsen advocacy group Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1134131591 32646 80.91.229.2 (9 Dec 2005 12:33:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 12:33:11 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+m10013@lists.math.uh.edu Fri Dec 09 13:33:08 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EkhQ1-0000Pi-QM for ding-account@gmane.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 13:32:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1EkhPx-0002Fd-00; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 06:32:05 -0600 Original-Received: from nas01.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.39]) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1EkhNa-0002FY-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 06:29:38 -0600 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by nas01.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1EkhNX-0001q3-A3 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 06:29:38 -0600 Original-Received: from washington.hostforweb.net ([66.225.201.13]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1EkhNW-000454-00 for ; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 13:29:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41228) by washington.hostforweb.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1EkhNV-00008d-9Q for ding@gnus.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 06:29:34 -0600 Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Face: #kKnN,xUnmKia.'[pp`;Omh}odZK)?7wQSl"4o04=EixTF+V[""w~iNbM9ZL+.b*_CxUmFk B#Fu[*?MZZH@IkN:!"\w%I_zt>[$nm7nQosZ<3eu;B:$Q_:p!',P.c0-_Cy[dz4oIpw0ESA^D*1Lw= L&i*6&( User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:5DHay7uPpddVodTK8e94yGpgYNA= X-Hashcash: 1:20:051209:ding@gnus.org::N6wOWQTT26om8mh6:000083IM X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - washington.hostforweb.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - gnus.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jpl.org X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) Precedence: bulk Original-Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:61481 Archived-At: >>>>> In Reiner Steib wrote: > I've used the following up to now: > (setq > mm-discouraged-alternatives > '("text/html" "text/richtext" "text/enriched" "multipart/related") > mm-automatic-display (remove "text/html" mm-automatic-display) > gnus-buttonized-mime-types '(".*/signed")) > I newer saw legitimate preferred image/.* parts in > multipart/alternative, but I hesitate to make such change based on my > usage only. If everyone agrees with this, we could change the > default. (Only in the trunk or in v5-10 too? Is it a bug that Gnus > displays image/* spam?) Opinions? I don't know how a multipart/alternative mail of which the second part is an image is useful (they are often pictures of pills ;-). There might be mailers which display both of two parts. (Gnus may have to do so if content types of two parts are different, e.g., one is text/*, the other is image/*.) At any rate, I think making it default to (image/.*) is commonly useful because most of such mails are spam and it is not worth seeing such images. >> My setting is: >> >> (setq gnus-buttonized-mime-types >> '("multipart/alternative" "multipart/signed") >> mm-discouraged-alternatives >> '("image/.+")) > Interesting idea! It allows to pick the alternative (text, html, gif) > an displays the plain/text at first: > ,---- >| 1. (*) multipart/alternative ( ) image/gif >| >| 2. (*) text/plain ( ) text/html > `---- > Could you please add this suggestion as an example to the manual? I'll do it next week. > (Maybe we write "/.*" instead of "/.+" as in other places; the > difference might confuse newbies. Or we could change everything to > "/.+" which is slightly more exact.) I'll also use `.*' since the differences aren't significant.